By changing
the way that we do business at NIH, the constituency which has the disease
for which you are scientifically responsible has some positive, productive,
contributory input to some of the elements of how you do the science–not
all, but some.

When the gay activists were demonstrating, predominantly against the
FDA but also against the NIH, and being very strident in their criticism,
I challenged them. I said, “Okay, come on in, sit down, and let's
talk about it. What is it that you want?” That was when we developed
relationships with them that are now very productive. We have activists
who are important members of our advisory councils. We consult back and
forth with them all the time. AIDS changed the way we do business at NIH
in that, when appropriate, the constituencies play a major role in some
of the policy and decision-making processes. You cannot just cave in and
let people tell you how to do science the wrong way, but there is a lot
you can learn from understanding how the disease is affecting a particular
population, somewhat removed from the bench, and removed from the “ivory
towers” that we have here.

For the complete transcript of this interview, go to the Transcripts page.